John Halton dijo [Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 11:53:29PM +0000]: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 09:11:19PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Gunnar Wolf: > > > > > 2- This is the main reason I contact -legal: The short license > > > regarding the Adobe PostScript AFM files does mention 'for any > > > purpose and without charge'. How would you interpret this? > > > > Compare the Adobe AFM license and the MIT license. 8-) > > Heh. Fair point. But the MIT licence is clearer: "Permission is hereby > granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy...". No risk > of confusion there. The Adobe licence, by contrast, reads like one of > the cautionary examples of ambiguous drafting that you get taught at > law school. :-)
Yup, that's precisely the point that made me bring this up on this list - The license text is ambiguous at best... So, part of the question would be where is this code used as well... -- Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
